[big-green-man]

> The places that aren't moderated are filled with political crap such as to tarnish their credibility, so that the people will stay away by their own will.

People say stupid shit. When you have a place where anyone can publish anything, you wind up with a lot of people publishing a lot of stuff you don't like.

You don't get to decide what sort of discourse or ideas are getting published. Nobody does. That's just part and parcel. You can block people, ignore people, but networks have their character.

The best network IMO for free speech is nostr. There are no controlled or verified identities, censorship is almost impossible. But it has it's character. The content there is the content there. It's mostly bitcoiners. Go use it stand talk about other things if you don't like that aspect.

[yqtjnvou]

It's much better to post imbecilities than to be moderated. Moderation is biased, unmoderated is not. You need to pick your poison.

I like everything pure. Stupidity is part of life; if the people are stupid, then we have a duty to teach them not to be so, instead of silencing them; wouldn't you agree?

[big-green-man]

I disagree that I have a duty to teach them, but I do agree that you shouldn't silence them. You can ignore them if you want.

[yqtjnvou]

If you know something that another does not, you should teach him. Otherwise, he will never learn any better. And if he doesn't learn any better, he will continue to spread its misinformation everywhere he goes. Ignoring him will not stop the spread of stupidness. That's why it is a duty.

The world is screwed up because everyone looks only to their bellies and their genitals - that's all. The foundation of consumption is based on this and everything evil is as well. I would like for people to think before they act; if they did so, bellies and genitals would no longer represent a factor.